nyan_sandwich comments on Terminal Bias - Less Wrong

18 [deleted] 30 January 2012 09:03PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (125)
Tags: bias metaethics

Comments (125)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: [deleted] 31 January 2012 11:55:44PM 0 points [-]

Why should someone with this view ever be given the position of judge? I would even be leery of entrusting a child to their care for an afternoon, let alone an upbringing.

(I assume that by "want to get out of it" you mean "expected negative total value" not "expected negative short-term value." One who delights in punishment is a brute, but one who shirks from meting out just punishment is infirm.)

Punishing people sucks the same way paying for stuff you take sucks, or working hard to achieve your goals sucks. You should be able to conceive of the fact that short term suck can pay for long term good. Pretending that punishment is good because it pays for good is stupid and you will get confused if you think like that.

A judge or parent who understands that punishment is bad is not necessarily going to not do it. They may also understand that following thru on punishment threats is necessary to keep the threat credible.

One who delights in punishment is a brute, but one who shirks from meting out just punishment is infirm.

Those words are loaded with connotation. Why are you using them? Say what is bad about punishing too much or too little without using words like that. You may find that too much punishment is bad because punishment is bad, and not enough punishment is bad because it fails to follow thru on the precommitment to punish that holds up the rule of law.

No. Next question.

Really? So theres no such thing as extenuating circumstances where we let someone off, but everyone understands that the threat of punishment is still there?

Maybe it was an accident, maybe punishing the weather won't make it sunnier, maybe we should deal with the insane a little bit differently.

Comment author: Vaniver 01 February 2012 03:20:28AM *  1 point [-]

You should be able to conceive of the fact that short term suck can pay for long term good.

Yes, of course. Indeed, there are few long term goods that can be purchased without short term suck.

But you weren't arguing that punishing criminals was a long term bad, or even insufficiently good. You were arguing that it was short term suck.

Those words are loaded with connotation. Why are you using them?

Invert the order of the sentences, and you have your answer. But I will answer at length:

The history and law and order is one of long and painful experience. The common law definition of "assault" did not spring forth from first principles, it was learned.

The source of order is deterrence; deterrence rests on expectations; expectations rest on identities. The brute is resisted in a way that the even-handed is not; the infirm are flaunted in a way that the firm are not.

So theres no such thing as extenuating circumstances where we let someone off, but everyone understands that the threat of punishment is still there?

Accepting any excuse reduces the credibility of the commitment. Sometimes you may think that reduction is acceptable, but you should never pretend it was absent.

Comment author: [deleted] 01 February 2012 05:39:38AM 0 points [-]

But you weren't arguing that punishing criminals was a long term bad, or even insufficiently good. You were arguing that it was short term suck.

Yes? Punishing criminals sucks, but it pays for the rule of law. I miss your point.

Invert the order of the sentences, and you have your answer. But I will answer at length:

still don't get it

The source of order is deterrence;

agree

deterrence rests on expectations;

agree

expectations rest on identities. The brute is resisted in a way that the even-handed is not; the infirm are flaunted in a way that the firm are not.

wat? I don't understand. What has identity got to do with anything? And too many loaded words. What does "even-handed" even mean, apart from "vaguely good and something to do with justice"?

Accepting any excuse reduces the credibility of the commitment. Sometimes you may think that reduction is acceptable, but you should never pretend it was absent.

Agreed. I thought you meant there weren't cases that were worth it.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 01 February 2012 06:30:34AM 1 point [-]

wat? I don't understand. What has identity got to do with anything?

If you consider "not being a brute" part of your identity, you are less likely to act like a brute.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit